67 urls, 66 blocked, one missed, 98.5% calculated overall effectiveness (programmatically calculated).
For me it works there, I almost conducted the test on Firefox but the animations weren’t as smooth as on Chrome. And I put a lot of effort into them.but how good is in firefox where it refuses to install
I have it on Firefox right now, no issues to report.but how good is in firefox where it refuses to install
I probably need to uninstall / reinstall firefox but don't know why that should be necessary, but good to know McAfee ext is working for you & others with firefox.
I think you need to reinstall McAfee. Otherwise, you just need to accept that there is no Firefox filtering. You probably didn’t approve their prompts and now it’s saved somewhere, probably in some JSON files (McAfee doesn’t use the registry to store settings).
Well, I made some nice tools to reduce the workload, otherwise it would’ve been 20 minutes. Yeah, I noticed there were few shortened URLs. I labelled 2 malware downloads as Phishing by mistake too@Trident Thank you very much for testing McAfee Web Protection. Wow, that's amazing, only one URL failed, almost reaching a 100% detection rate. McAfee even blocked TinyURL URL shortener and Twitter shortener, and even so, McAfee blocked almost all of them. McAfee seems to be looking ahead, very good. I watched the entire 8:59 video, and for me it was worth it.
That's cool, impressive, you have to put your mind to work, literally. You're right, even if the video was 20 minutes long, I would watch it from beginning to end without any problem. The tools were new to me, so I'm learning as I go.
No problem, regardless of that, McAfee did its job blocking the URLs.Yeah, I noticed there were few shortened URLs. I labelled 2 malware downloads as Phishing by mistake too
It is impressive to see McAfee's behaviour, implementing these blocks. They have essentially redesigned almost every product, and this has been successful, representing a paradigm shift. So far, I have not seen a system with McAfee installed compromised by malware, nor have I seen a false positive, and this gives users greater confidence. It is rare for a product with a 98.5% detection rate to have no false positives. I hope it stays that way.
.Yeah, I know on Reddit, you get downvoted to hell if you so much as hint towards recommending McAfee. Sure, it used to be bad, but now it's actually an antivirus you might want.McAfee still gets a lot of bad press, but these days it's pretty efficient and hogs much less resources. I think people remember the bad days when it was installed on every PC/Laptop by default and was so very hard to remove and sucked a lot of resources but it's been slimmed down and it's protection is now top notch as seen in Trident video. 1 missed sample is pretty good if you ask me
Wasn't that the case with Adobe, when you downloaded the Flash Player plugins, Adobe pushed the McAfee installer along with it? Or am I confusing it with another AV? Does anyone remember this?
Might sound dumb, but is it possible if you could attach virustotal to this tool, showing how many engines on vt has detected the url youre testing on
I only recently came to appreciate that McAfee achieved something of an "ultramodern" antivirus since reengineering it from the ground up, even if it can't be considered perfect. Very innovative and slim. It is a shame that the old reputation will be hard to cast off.McAfee still gets a lot of bad press, but these days it's pretty efficient and hogs much less resources. I think people remember the bad days when it was installed on every PC/Laptop by default and was so very hard to remove and sucked a lot of resources but it's been slimmed down and it's protection is now top notch as seen in Trident video. 1 missed sample is pretty good if you ask me
Yet Google does/did that kind of stuff with Chrome and got away with it. I think the problem was it came preinstalled with only a 3 month/6 month license then you had to renew at high cost.
